Interbehavioral field systems assessment: Examining its utility in preservice teacher education

Behavior analytic evaluation instruments should benefit teacher education programs in assessing: (a) teacher and student interactions in practice teaching settings, and (b) the immediate and long range effects of the teacher training received. Though empirical substantiation remains scarce, such instruments may be designed to foster teacher trainee sensitivity to, and better control of, complex stimulus and response mechanisms which either impede or facilitate learning. This study analyzed one technologically driven Behavior Analysis Strategy and Taxonomy (BEST) and related Temporal Analysis System (TAS) (Hawkins, Sharpe, & Ray, 1994) currently used within one preservice teacher education program. A multiple probe design with experimental and control groups demonstrated the instruments' effects when used as an instructional feedback tool with teachers in training. Findings supported the instruments' use in terms of teacher and student behavior changes demonstrated for the experimental group as compared to a control group not exposed to the instrument. Implications of this technology when applied to teacher education are last described.     

A test of interpersonal theory of depression in children and adolescents using a projective technique

Using a projective technique among child and adolescent psychiatric inpatients, we tested several hypotheses derived from Coyne's (1976b) interpersonal theory of depression. First, we predicted that depression would be associated with rejection, even controlling for the effects of aggression. Depression and rejection were associated only when aggression effects were covaried. Second, we hypothesized that the depression-rejection relation would display symptom specificity. Consistent with this hypothesis, we found that depression, but not anxiety, was related to rejection. Third, we assessed whether an index of interpersonal style—reliance on others—moderated the depression-rejection relation. Results suggested that depression and overreliance were both associated with high rejection scores, whereas the combination of low depression and low reliance on others was associated with low rejection scores. We found that results held across age groups. The implications of our findings for the interpersonal theory of depression in youngsters are discussed.     

Intuition and the socratic method: Two opposed ways of knowing?

Socratic method and intuition are two ways of knowing commonly thought as opposed. The author shows how both ways of knowing can be linked in an education that has philosophy as its armature.     

The role of theory in treating adolescent substance abuse

The adolescent substance abuser, like adult addicts, is most commonly considered from the perspective of the disease model. The usefulness of the disease model in conceptualizing adolescent substance abuse is questioned, and an alternative view of the topic is set forth. Substance abuse, is regarded as an adaptive aspect of the ongoing interactive processes within the family. The developmental process of the adolescent substance abuser is seen as a functional dynamic in the family's preservation. Three characteristic elements of parental interaction common to the development of adolescent substance abuse are highlighted.An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Texas Association for Marriage and Family Therapy annual conference on January 28, 1993 in Houston Texas.a research associate and director of the Don D. Jackson Archive at the Mental Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA. Authors are listed alphabetically.     

Question-begging and infinite regress

InMetaphysics , Ch. 4, Aristotle speaks of both infinite regress and question-begging, but does not explicitly relate them. We get the impression that he thinks that to use one of these arguments to avoid the other is to jump from the frying-pan into the fire. This relationship is illustrated in terms of the ignorant belief that everything can be proved, and of attempts to prove the Law of Noncontradiction.     

Latent Structure of the Sources of Mathematics Self-Efficacy

General social cognitive theory and its career-specific elaborations posit four primary sources through which self-efficacy beliefs are acquired and modified: personal performance accomplishments, vicarious learning, social persuasion, and physiological states and reactions. We present two studies exploring the dimensionality of these sources within the context of career-relevant mathematics activities. In Study 1, 295 college students completed measures of the source variables. Testing two- through five-factor models, we found strongest support for a four-factor latent structure of the efficacy sources. In Study 2, involving 481 high school students, a five-factor model fit the data well. We also found evidence of a higher order factor structure in both samples. Several directions for further research on the sources of efficacy information are considered, along with implications for career and academic interventions.     

Logical consequence: A defense of Tarski

In his classic 1936 essay “On the Concept of Logical Consequence”, Alfred Tarski used the notion of satisfaction to give a semantic characterization of the logical properties. Tarski is generally credited with introducing the model-theoretic characterization of the logical properties familiar to us today. However, in his book, The Concept of Logical Consequence, Etchemendy argues that Tarski's account is inadequate for quite a number of reasons, and is actually incompatible with the standard model-theoretic account. Many of his criticisms are meant to apply to the model-theoretic account as well. In this paper, I discuss the following four critical charges that Etchemendy makes against Tarski and his account of the logical properties:

1. Tarski's account of logical consequence diverges from the standard model-theoretic account at points where the latter account gets it right.
2. Tarski's account cannot be brought into line with the model-theoretic account, because the two are fundamentally incompatible.
3. There are simple counterexamples (enumerated by Etchemendy) which show that Tarski's account is wrong.
4. Tarski committed a modal fallacy when arguing that his account captures our pre-theoretical concept of logical consequence, and so obscured an essential weakness of the account.
5. Tarski's account depends on there being a distinction between the “logical terms” and the “non-logical terms” of a language, but (according to Etchemendy) there are very simple (even first-order) languages for which no such distinction can be made. Etchemendy's critique raises historical and philosophical questions about important foundational work. However, Etchemendy is mistaken about each of these central criticisms. In the course of justifying that claim, I give a sustained explication and defense of Tarski's account. Moreover, since I will argue that Tarski's account and the model-theoretic account really do come to the same thing, my subsequent defense of Tarski's account against Etchemendy's other attacks doubles as a defense against criticisms that would apply equally to the familiar model-theoretic account of the logical properties.